MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016493904 · doi:10.4236/ojog.2012.23052

Feasibility of incorporating a bed-rest exercise program during a twin pregnancy: Case reports

2012· article· en· W2016493904 on OpenAlexaff
Chantale R. Brun, Jo-Anne Hammond, Michelle F. Mottola

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern UniversityUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBed restMedicineDeconditioningPregnancyRest (music)Twin PregnancyBlood pressureHeart ratePhysical therapyObstetricsSurgeryInternal medicineFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the maternal risk for both short- and long-term disability imposed by activity restriction, it is of great concern that the antepartum symptoms of bed rest are still evident in the postpartum period. The benefits of bed-rest-exercise may alleviate or even prevent physiological distresses or deconditioning associated with activity restriction, thus, eliminating or stabilizing, factors that may augment existing complications. This is the first study to investigate the feasibility of incorporating a bed-rest exercise program in a specific hospitalized twin pregnancy case. The maternal physiological responses of heart rate, blood pressure and uterine contractions to a four week bed-rest resistance program were measured in a woman hospitalized due to complications during her twin pregnancy. A second participant (same diagnoses) was included as a control. The bed-rest-exercise reduced the degree of swelling in the lower extremities, promoted more energy during the day and a better night’s sleep. There were no significant differences in uterine contractions pre vs. post protocol and all babies were born healthy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207